AGREED!

Almost like sending a GoPro back seventy years ago.

​@@pixer415 or like those AI frame rate upscalers

Mike Todd had nothing to do with the 2x Todd-AO demos

Also bit of a sidenote. The tune playing while the rollercoaster sequence is starting is a carnival version of "After the ball" - coincidentally used in another R&H production, Show Boat.

At the Gaumont Manchester the Philips DP70 projectors didn't half used to rattle when set at 30fps for The Miracle of Todd AO. Then we had to change over to 24fps on the other projector for the opening of South Pacific ( Part 1 of 13 reels. Happy Times, Nigel

Some of them were shot in the process. The Alamo, Cleopatra, The Agony and the Ecstasy for example.

I rode this coaster for real between 1960-67 at POP, Ocean Park, Los Angeles. A great, fast stomach churner!

Actually it was 3 front, 1 rear and bass effects either as 2 bass only channels or 1 dedicated subwoofer for the majority of films in the Dolby era.

Thanks!

I believe Old Fast Glass has a set.

@@cameronmcalpine7614 I look them up and go from there.

Curved monitors have gone the way of 3-D TV! 😃

@Wiley Combs The Cinerama immersive effect was the result of covering most of the human field of vision. Fred Waller, inventor of Cinerama made many experiments and found out it could be achieved with 146° horirontally and 55° vertically. As such a wide angle wasn't possible with a sngle lens and camera, a triple camera was used with corresponding triple projectors. As it was impossible to achieve such a wide angle on a flat screen, a deeply curvend screnn had to be used. I have seen almost all of the Cinerama films (but Brothers Grimm) at the Paris Cinerama theater., The seams between the three image wern't always perfect (it improved a lot with time) but it didn't spoil at all the immersive effect. All attempts to get the Cinerama effect with a single camera and projector, starting with Todd AO 70mm failed because of insufficient shooting angle. Todd AO had a 120° lens but it was hardly used because of heavy distortion. Anyhow filmakers preferred the conventional narrow angles lens which were also available. the result was the loss of the Cinerama effect despite the film being projected on a curved Cinerama screen. It was the same with other 70mm process such as Super Panavision and Ultra Panavision which didn't had ultra wide shooting lens. I remember seeing "The fall of the Roman Empire" filmed in Ultra Panavision at the Paris Cinerama theater, and having been much disappointed, the Cinerama effect was completly lost despite being presented on the wide curved Cinerama screen. Anamorphic filming involve using special lens which compress image to acheive widescreen projection with a non widescreen film. It's used mainly by CinemaScope, using a 2.0 compression ration lens the achieve a 2.4 aspect ratio screen with a 1.2 aspect ratio film. But its not enough to achieve the Cinerama effect. Imax is not at all anamorphic, it uses standard "spherical" lens or "fisheye" for dome. I have seen all kinds of Imax 70mm presentations (2D, 3D, flat sreen, dome screen) at the Futuroscope in France, and despite the huge image quality, there wasn't an immersive effect as good as Cinerama because of insufficient width.

@Wiley Combs That main problem is not distortion on the edge, Imax (70mm) uses mostly Hasselblad lenses first designed for its medium format still cameras. I have not noticed disturbing distortion on the edges when watchind Imax projections. I found the image sharpness excellent, but It didn't provided the Cinerama immersive effect because of insufficient widthe angle. It's true that human vision width is more than 146°, but Waller found out that 146° was enough to provide the immersive effect. Dr Vetter who worked on driving simulators for UCLA found out that 150° was required for peripheral vision (much the same as 146°), and designed a 150° lens for 70mm cameras. It's been a little used on the "Dimension 150" name but only two films were shot with this process ("Patton" and "The Bible"), but like the 120° lens of Todd AO, the 150° lens was hardly used because of heavy distortion, most of the film were shot with conventional angle lens. Of course, the brain focus on central vision, and peripheral vision is not as sharp as central vision, but peripheral vision is neccessary to provide a sense of depth for distant things. I saw twice the film "Wings of courage" in Imax 3D and was disappointes by mountain images which lacked depth because of insufficient lateral peripheral vision. Stereoscopy works only for close vision (no more than around 20 feet). Cinerama was complex and costly, this is why the investors who had taken control of the Cinerama company decided to replace it by single lens 70mm, but the immersive effect was lost, and Cinerama lost its attraction power, and this killed Cinerama. The search for more profits didn't work... Without peripheral vision, it's like looking through a keyhole. Another problem is that filmmakers didn't like much Cinerama, as they couldn't play with various angles and couldn't make close-up.

@Wiley Combs I am not a filmmaker, but I have been a filmgoer for over 70 years (I just turned 80). I first saw films in CinemaScope and Cinerama in the mid fifties. I have seen film shot in many other process : VistaVision, Technirama, etc. I have seen all the real "three strips" cinerama films but "Brothers Grimm", the five "travelogues" and "Conquest of the west". If have also seen the first two "Kinopanorama" films, the soviet copy of cinerama at the Paris Kinopanorama theater. I have seen all kinds of Imax process at the Futuroscope, 2D, 3D flat screen, dome, and even the "magic carpet" (using a second projector under spectators trough a transparent floor) I have also seen 70mm Ultra Panavision (2.75 AR) at the Paris Cinerama theater (The fall of the Roman empire), and 70mm Super Panavision (2.2 AR) at the London Cinerama theater (2001, a space odyssey). I saw again 2001 in 70mm on flat screen more recently. I have also seen a 4K digital projection from a 65mm shot film (Samsara). Filmmakers didn't like the triple Cinerama camera, because filming only at a 146° angle was someting special there weren't used to do and impaired their creativity without the possibility to change shooting angles, doing close up, etc. The use of the triple Cinerama camera was dropped in 1963, and all subsequent cinerama films were shot in 70mm (65mm in fact) Ultra Panavision, which used a specific 1.25 ratio anomorphic lense to get a 2,75 aspect ratio out of a 2.2 aspect ratio film, so the full width of the Cinerama screen could be filled. When I saw "the fall of the Roman Empire" in 1963, I remember having been very disappointed, the immersive effect of Cinerama had disappeared dispite the Cinerama screen being fully covered. This was because of insufficient shooting angle. And projection brightness wasn't as good as with the triple projectors. What had made Cinerama successful was its immersive effect, but with the switch to single lens 70mm film, this effect was lost, and the success of Cinerama faded out little by little. In the early seventies there has been a Cinerama retrospective at the Paris Cinerama theater, most of "three strips" Cinerama films being showed again. But after that, it was the end for Cinerama. Almost all Cinerama theaters in the world were closed. The Paris one has been transformed into a TV studio for public shows. My long moviegoer experience showed me that there is no subtitute for very wide angle, both for shooting and projection if a real immersive effect is to be achieved. If one of the two is missing, it doesn't work...

only had SD source!

One is a slave to your source material, my friend. Feel free to find better!